Thesis: In the nineteenth century, America pursued a policy of imperialism in
the Philippines under the guise of protecting the world from the oppression of
Spanish rule. This caused much controversy both in the political arena as
well as among the citizens.

I. Throughout its development, America has crafted its expansionist policies;
this expansion, however, had always been confined to the North American
continent.

A. The philosophies of the ordinances of 1784, 1785 and 1787 as well as the
Monroe Doctrine and the Manifest Destiny governed the acquisition of new
territory.

B. In the Ostend Manifesto, America looks to acquire Cuba.

II. Beginning in the mid-nineteenth century, there was an urge to expand
outside of the continent for various reasons.

A. Americans believed themselves to be racially superior to others.

B. America wanted a favorable balance of trade.

C. America needed to make exports exceed imports.

D. America was looking for fresh land to conquer (islands in warm oceans).

E. America sought to spread Christianity.

F. America sought to expand foreign markets.

G. There was the necessity of annexing some property.

H. America had a strong sense of nationalism during the era known in Europe
as the Race for Empire.

III. When the issue of the Philippines arises, there is a stark break with
past forms of imperialism. Instead of seeking to add the Philippines as a
state, America sought the conquest of the Philippines as an imperialist colony
that they would rule either formally or informally.

A. War with Spain.

B. Domestic motives for expansionism.

C. Debates over the issue of imperialism.

IV. Administration of the Philippines.

A. The American administration of the Philippines was a completely new
experience for the nation that was once itself colonized by another nation.

B. After the election of 1900 debates over Philippine policy ensued.

V. The Philippines gains its independence in 1946 after being an imperial
territory of America.

American Imperialism in the Philippines:

A Revolution in American Foreign Policy

In 1898, in an effort to free Cuba from the oppression of its Spanish
colonizers, America captured the Philippines. This brought about questions of
what America should do with the Philippines. Soon, controversy ensued both in
the American political arena as well as among its citizens. Throughout its
history, America had always been expansionistic, but it had always limited
itself to the North American continent. Beginning in the mid-nineteenth
century, however, there emerged a drive to expand outside of the continent.
When America expanded to the Philippines, the policy it followed was a stark
break from past forms of expansionism. Despite much controversy, America
followed the example of the imperialistic nations in Europe and sought to
conquer the Philippines as an imperialist colony that they would rule either
directly or indirectly.

Throughout its development, America has molded its expansionist policies,
which it confined to the North American continent. The ordinances of 1784,
1785 and 1787 governed the acquisition and administration of new territory,
which set a precedent for establishing future territorial acquisitions as
states equal to those already established[i].
They were designed to settle the West in an orderly fashion while at the same
time, lessening the possibility of secessionist movements. More importantly,
the ordinances served to prevent the emergence of dependent colonies. In
addition, by adding a new “western” aspect to the national identity, they set
a trend for westward expansion (Henretta 181).

The Monroe Doctrine and the Manifest Destiny stated America’s philosophies
regarding foreign policy. The Monroe Doctrine (1823), crafted by President
Monroe and Secretary of State John Quincy Adams, was a statement of America’s
foreign policy. It warned Europe to stay out of the Western Hemisphere.
Monroe particularly did not want Spain to attempt to reacquire its former
colonies that declared their independence (Monroe).

The idea of Manifest Destiny stemmed in part from the ideas of the Monroe
Doctrine. It was an intangible concept best described as a pervasive thirst
for expansion in America that shaped American history. Americans believed
that it was their destiny to encompass the entire North American continent (Lubbrage
1). The westward migration of American settlers and European immigrants to
the Midwest in the 1840’s and 1850’s prompted this movement. Swayed by
popular zeal for expansion, political leaders chose to neglect the conflicts
that would ensue with Mexico and Great Britain (Henretta 360). In his
document entitled Manifest Destiny (1845) – from which the movement received
its name – O’Sullivan articulated the philosophies of Manifest Destiny. He
envisioned in America’s future, the “defence of humanity, of the oppressed of
all nations, of the rights of conscience, the rights of personal
enfranchisement.” He believed that America was the chosen country to do this,
as it did not have a history of conflict except in the defense of its freedom
(O’Sullivan paragraph 4). Americans saw it as their divine mission to expand
to spread democracy and Christianity (Henretta 360).

A critical turning point in American expansion was when America first looked
to Cuba. During this period of westward expansion, the new political movement
known as “Young America” – which consisted mostly of southerners – took
Manifest Destiny to a global scale by looking southward and to the Atlantic,
particularly to Cuba, a major producer of sugar and tobacco. In addition,
slaves worked the plantations of Cuba. At this time, President Franklin
Pierce pursued expansionist policies; in particular, he wanted Cuba. He saw
Cuba as a slaveholding Spanish possession that would become a slave state if
annexed[1].
He hoped the slaveholding elite in Cuba would declare independence from
Spain. Once independent, he would invite it to join the Union. In 1853, he
secretly sent John A. Quitman to aid in the revolution. While this was
happening, he threatened war with Spain over its confiscation of an American
ship. Fearing the addition of a new slave state, however, northern Democrats
in the senate forced Pierce to back down (Henretta 378). This shows that at
this time, domestic political pressure limited foreign expansion.

The Pierce administration, however, was still determined to acquire Cuba and
so Secretary of State William L. Marcy commanded Pierre Soulé, the American
minister to Spain, “to detach that island from the Spanish dominion” by
purchase. Therefore, Soulé offered Spain $130,000 for Cuba. Spain, however,
found this offer insulting and rejected it. In response to this, Soulé wrote
a secret document, the Ostend Manifesto, which invoked the rhetoric of
Manifest Destiny. In it, he said that the mere possession of Cuba by Spain
was a threat to American security and America would be justified in seizing
Cuba by force. The controversy that ensued over this issue left it
temporarily undecided (Henretta 378-379).

Following the Civil War, expansionist ideals resurfaced and fundamental shifts
in American culture and society made imperialism more appealing. These shifts
occurred in economic, racial, cultural and military facets of America.

Americans had sought a favorable balance of trade since 1876 (Suzara). An
economic boom, in which America’s gross national product quadrupled,
“transformed America into the biggest granary on earth, a foremost
manufacturer of consumer goods and a major producer of coal, iron and steel.”
(Karnow 89) Because America was still a developing country, it attracted many
foreign investors while very little was invested abroad (Karnow 82). In order
to balance out this unequal flow of funds, America had to make its exports
exceed its imports (Karnow 82). By 1895, foreign business had drawn near the
2 billion mark and the export of manufactured goods was increasing the fastest
of all (Wolff 12). While most of the production – over 90 percent – was
consumed in America, foreign markets were still very important. Americans
feared that its increasing production would far exceed its consumption. The
solution was to ensure that there would always be a market for its surplus
products. This meant the necessity for more foreign markets (Pomeroy 18-20).
Richard E. Welch corroborates this in his book “Response to Imperialism: The
United States and the Philippine-American War, 1899-1902”:

Business leaders, convinced that the home market was inadequate to the needs
of expanding industrial production, persuaded the administration that an
island empire would increase exports and foreign commerce and provide
protection and stimulus for the China trade. (3)

There was also the issue of race. Herbert Spencer’s idea of “Social
Darwinism”, which was based on Charles Darwin’s theory of “survival of the
fittest”, asserted Anglo-Saxon racial superiority (Karnow 81). America,
successor to Britain as leader of the Anglo-Saxon race, believed that it had
to spread its culture and institutions over the earth (Karnow 81). This was
partly influenced by Rudyard Kipling’s poem “White Man’s Burden[ii]”,
which Kipling specifically wrote to encourage America to colonize the
Philippines. The poem advocated imperialism by saying that it was the duty of
the Anglo-Saxon race to colonize over inferior people to civilize them and
make them more European-like (Fry 383). America also sought to spread
Christianity. At this time, America was predominantly Protestant while the
Spanish colonies were predominantly Roman Catholic. America also saw it as
their duty to convert the Catholics to Protestantism (Suzara).

Americans also perceived a necessity of annexing some territory (Suzara).
During the 1850’s, Americans showed a certain arrogance because of their own
independence. They seized territory from Mexico and contemplated seizing Cuba
and Santo Domingo (Karnow 81). In “The Law of Civilization and Decay”, Brooks
Adams called upon the ideals of Social Darwinism asserting that “not to
advance is to recede” and therefore, in order to survive, America must expand
(Henretta 590). America also felt that it had to join in the European race
for empire. Throughout the nineteenth century, as Britain was granting
freedom to many of its territories in Canada and Australia, it was acquiring
more and more territories elsewhere. Soon the other European countries
followed suit. Aside from a source for creating mercantilist empires,
colonies had become a symbol of stature for nations (Jantzen 570). Because of
a strong sense of nationalism, America felt it had to join in the race. Also,
in The Influence of Sea Power upon history, 1600-1783, Captain Alfred
T. Mahan emphasized the necessity of annexing the Caribbean Islands, Hawaii
and the Philippine Islands in order to create bases to protect American
commerce (“Chronology” paragraph 3).

When the issue of the Philippines arose during of the Spanish-American War,
however, America pursued an expansionist policy that broke sharply with past
forms of expansion. According to Henretta, as Spain lost its South American
possessions in the early nineteenth century, the Cubans also sought their
independence (591). In 1895, José Martí reinvigorated the Cuban struggle for
freedom that had been quelled during the Ten Years’ War[iii]
(1868-1878). Sympathizing with the Cubans, President Grover Cleveland pushed
Spain to come to an agreement with Cuba. Instead, Spain tried to pacify the
Cubans by sending General Valeriano Weyler whose policy of reconcentration[2]
of the Cubans greatly increased American support for the Cuban cause. This
led to widespread anti-Spanish sentiment in America, which helped drive it to
war in 1898 (Trask).

The most important event in propelling America to war, however, was the
sinking of the Battleship Maine. The U.S.S. Maine was anchored in Havana
simply to provide a naval presence in Cuba. In February of 1898, an explosion
on the Maine caused it to sink, killing 266 sailors. While investigations
could not prove the exact cause of the explosion, many Americans suspected a
Spanish mine was to blame. Even though President McKinley strongly opposed
any military intervention, he was forced to give Spain an ultimatum. He
demanded that Spain grant Cuba its independence but Spain refused. On April
23, Spain ceased diplomatic negotiations and on April 24, declared war[iv]
(Trask).

Immediately at the start of the war, Commodore George Dewey – who was
stationed in Hong Kong in preparation for an attack against the Spanish
territories– set sail for the Philippines (Henretta 594). On May 1, he
defeated the Spanish fleet in Manila Bay. After this victory, McKinley
allowed a small army contingent to land in Manila to maintain pressure on
Spain, which many hoped would lead to an early end to the war (Trask).

McKinley, however, did not really have a plan for dealing with the Spaniards
in the Philippines. This forced Dewey and Major General Wesley Merritt – who
had arrived with an infantry – to improvise. Their main concern was to defeat
the Spaniards and so they enlisted the support of the Filipino rebels led by
Emilio Aguinaldo. When Aguinaldo asked Captain Edward P. Wood of the U.S.S.
Petrel – who was in the Philippines to negotiate on behalf of Dewey – what
America’s intentions towards the Philippines were, Wood responded that the
United States was “very great and rich, and did not need colonies.” He also
said that Dewey would put such a statement in writing. Thus, Aguinaldo agreed
to aid the Americans if Dewey gave him an official request as well as a
written pledge of U.S. support for his cause. However, E. Spencer Pratt, the
U.S. Consul in the Philippines, informed Dewey – who was in Hong Kong waiting
for Aguinaldo to join him – that Aguinaldo was willing to join him without
mentioning Aguinaldo’s terms. Dewey tersely responded “TELL AGUINALDO COME
SOON AS POSSIBLE”. When Aguinaldo asked about the written pledge, Pratt told
him that Dewey had assured him that the United States would “at least
recognize the independence of the Philippines under an American naval
protectorate”. He also assured him that “The words of a United States navy
officer and an American consul represent a solemn pledge” and that “The United
States government is a very honorable, very just and very powerful
government” (Karnow 110-112).

By May, however, to prevent him from making any untoward promises to the
Filipinos, the U.S. Department of the Navy ordered the recently promoted
Admiral Dewey to gradually dissociate himself from Aguinaldo. Dewey’s primary
objective in the Philippines was to capture Manila and he believed that this
could best be achieved without the help of the Filipino “insurgents”. Towards
the end of July, America’s 12,000 troops equaled those of the Filipino rebels
and relations between the two soon declined (“Spanish” paragraph 4).

At the end of the war, Spain relinquished control over Cuba, ceded Puerto Rico
and Guam to America and agreed that America would occupy Manila until a treaty
was formed (Henretta 594). In the Treaty of Paris (1899), the United States
paid Spain $20 million for the Philippines. The treaty required two thirds of
the senatorial vote to pass. It passed by merely one vote. This explains why
Americans were unsure how to proceed with the Philippines. McKinley had
several options. He could return the Philippines to Spain, but that seemed
“cowardly and dishonorable”. Alternatively, he could divide the Philippines
among the Great Powers but he decided that to do so would be to relinquish
valuable territory to “our commercial rivals in the Orient – that would have
been bad business and discreditable.” The most practical option, of course,
was to grant the Philippines independence, but imperialists eventually
convinced McKinley that “we could not leave [the Filipinos] to themselves –
they were unfit for self-rule – and they would soon have anarchy and misrule
over there worse that Spain’s was” (Karnow 127-128).

On February 4, 1899, two days before the Senate ratified the Treaty of Paris,
fighting broke out between Filipino guerrillas and American troops stationed
in Manila. Faced with the prospect of American annexation, Aguinaldo – who
was declared president of the Philippines in January – continued the struggle
for freedom, only this time, from the Americans. This began the Philippine
American War[v].
Like the Spaniards in Cuba, the Americans needed to use the same
reconcentration strategy to deal with the Filipino guerrillas. Following
America’s victory after three years of fighting, Judge William Howard Taft
established a civilian government (Henretta 598).

After defeating Spain, America was uncertain as to what to do with the
Philippines but it leaned on the side of imperialism. The arrogance that
Americans exhibited in the mid-nineteenth century was still strong and this
was just increased by the American victory in Manila Bay. It was like a rite
of passage that elevated America to the ranks of the world powers. What began
as an effort to liberate the Spanish territories from the oppression of
imperialism propelled America to take the Philippines. Soon, however, this
morphed into a struggle to crush the Filipino independence movement. This was
the first time American soldiers fought across the ocean and the first time
America acquired territory beyond its continent – the former colony itself
becoming imperialist. Because of the massive amount of European immigration
into America, the nation sought unity and cohesion and found it in its
patriotic expansion. America had a high sense of moral purpose. Unlike the
Europeans who merely sought profit and power through their imperialism, the
Americans sought to spread the benefits of its culture to the world. McKinley
was swept up by these sentiments and allowed them to affect his foreign policy
decisions. The American excursions into the Philippines established an
American presence in the Far East – thus expanding America’s foreign markets (Karnow
79-80). American businessmen also realized the benefit of the Philippines as
an Asian trading post (Suzara).

Activities in the Philippines aroused much controversy in America. The
Imperialists advanced several practical arguments. They argued that expansion
abroad would yield profit and that the American economy would deteriorate
without foreign markets (Karnow 82). Henry Cabot Lodge, a proponent of
imperialism, declared, “We must on no account let the islands go … We hold the
other side of the Pacific, and the value to this country is almost beyond
imagination.” Albert Jeremiah Beveridge, who shared the same sentiments,
advocated America’s imperialism for the purpose of bettering the world by
asserting “We are a conquering race … American law, American order, American
civilization and the American flag will plant themselves on shores hitherto
bloody and benighted, but by those agencies of God henceforth to be made
beautiful and bright” (Karnow 109).

The imperialists, however, faced much opposition. On June 15, 1898, The
Anti-Imperialist League was formed to oppose the annexation of the
Philippines. Its members included Andrew Carnegie and Mark Twain. Mark Twain
noted that Americans “have gone there to conquer, not to redeem” the
Philippines (Trask). Anti-imperialists argued that the annexation of the
Philippines violated the constitutional precept of government through the
consent of the governed. Carnegie was worried that these foreign ventures
would dissipate the nation’s wealth. People also feared the influx of
Filipinos that would ensue if America annexed the Philippines. Racists were
afraid that the “yellow people” would contaminate American culture (Karnow
82). Charles Shurz, a militant enemy of expansionism, argued that “To annex
the Philippines, would not only violate America’s principles of ‘right,
justice and liberty’, but also bring an influx of more or less barbarous
Asiatics into the US.” (Karnow 109-110) Workers also feared that Filipino
immigrants would compete with them for jobs. Presbyterian ministers disdained
the “idea that the reign of Jesus is to be widened under the protection of
shells and dynamite.” (Karnow 82) The Democratic Party used the news of the
atrocities America was committing in the Philippines in its arguments against
the imperialist Republican Party (Corpuz 65).

After defeating the Filipino Guerrillas, the American occupation regime began
rebuilding the Philippines along the American model. According to Onofre
Corpuz, the Americans “energetically embarked on constructive projects in the
fields of education, health and sanitation, public works, communications,
transportation, resources development, legal and juridical reform, and
technological innovation.” (66) In 1935, America made the Philippines into a
semi-autonomous commonwealth. The previous year, Congress passed the
Philippine Independence Act, which was based on traditional imperialist
rhetoric. It arranged for a preparatory period (1935-1946) in which America
would prime the Filipinos for independence (Corpuz 66).

America’s administration over the Philippines also brought about much
controversy[vi].
Immediately following the 1900 U.S. election was the first conflict over the
formation of Philippine policy. Although the capture of the Philippines had
expansionist aims, it did not necessarily mean that expansionists had full
control of the administration of the Philippines. Senator John C. Spooner of
Wisconsin proposed a bill to quell the Filipino resistance and assuming “all
military, civil and judicial powers necessary to govern the said islands.”
After the election, imperialists urged the passage of the Spooner bill.
According to the Secretary of War Elihu Root “The army has brought the
Philippines to the point where they offer a ready and attractive field for
investment and enterprise, but to make this possible there must be mining
laws, homestead and land laws, general transportation laws, and banking and
currency laws.” Lodge hoped to pass the bill past the anti-imperialist
opposition by reserving the right to alter it. Those who opposed the bill
tried to amend it to extend constitutional guarantees to the Filipinos and to
declare America’s withdrawal from the Philippines once a stable government was
established (Pomeroy 118-120). Arguments over trade policy, which resulted in
the Insular Cases (1899-1901), soon followed the arguments over the Spooner
Bill. The Insular Cases established a colonial relationship with the
Philippines (Pomeroy 121-123).

America eventually followed through with its promise to grant the Philippines
full independence in 1946 after almost half a century of U.S. colonial rule.
This period of colonial rule over the Philippines represented a unique era in
the history of American foreign policy in which imperialism replaced
traditional forms of expansionism. The race for empire that America had
entered would eventually propel America into two world wars and transform the
isolationism of the Monroe Doctrine into the interventionism of the Truman
Doctrine[vii].
America had adopted a new foreign policy in which it sought to take an active
role in the world stage.

Fry, Howard T. “The Breakdown of the American
Democratic Experiment in the Philippines: An Historical Analysis of a Crisis
in Modernization.” Australian Journal of Politics and History. 23(3)
(1977): 383-402.

Henretta, James A., David Brody, and Lynn
Dumenil. America: A Concise History. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s,
1999.

Welch, Richard E., Jr. Response to
Imperialism: The United States and the Philippine-American War, 1899-1902.
Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1979.

Wolff, Leon. Little Brown Brother: How the
United States Purchased and Pacified the Philippine Islands at the Century’s
Turn. New York: Doubleday and Company, 1961.

Endnotes

[1] During this period before
the Civil War, slaveholding and non-slaveholding states vied for influence
in the political arena. The balance between slave and free states was
crucial.

[2] The Cuban resistance
consisted entirely of guerrillas. The key to their success was to hide
among the villagers. General Valeriano Weyler y Nicolau recognized this.
His policy of reconcentration moved the Cuban civilians en masse to central
locations under the control of the Spanish Army. The idea was to keep the
civilians alive until Spain had won a victory. Unfortunately, more than 30
percent of the civilians died because of bad living conditions (Trask).